I have to ask -- why would one want that to change so that, as you appear to suggest, strategy becomes the (or even 'a') driver?
Ken - that may get into to if somebody wants to be more efficient or more effective in a given area.

I had a discussion with a buddy a couple of weeks ago about how hard it is to convince people that sometimes you become more efficient (not having to spend years adapting, re-doing, or re-learning and spending more blood and treasure while risking other objectives) through being more effective.

The cost may be more up front, but ultimately less than it would be if you went in with the idea that you can always increase effectiveness via efficiencies. This is not just about defense spending priorities, but about the closely held values you design your policies and programs to support.

Caveat 1- sometimes its going to be long and ugly just because long and ugly is what you bit into - buyer beware.

Caveat 2 - sometimes you may not intend to be effective at all, and your actions to become more efficient in one area are based on your priorities in others. Domestic programs cost allot of money (every policitian has them regardless of party) and like R&D engineering they often have cost overuns.

Best, Rob